From: sds@tycho.nsa.gov (Stephen Smalley) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:32:03 -0500 Subject: [refpolicy] Transition unconfined users to dpkg_t domain In-Reply-To: <52CF05E6.7070904@redhat.com> References: <20140107132919.5779c6c0@soldur.bigon.be> <20140107181207.13f8826d@soldur.bigon.be> <20140109132449.783398e6@soldur.bigon.be> <1389275208.14773.43.camel@x220.localdomain> <20140109165738.77a1d0a8@soldur.bigon.be> <1389283972.15747.21.camel@x220.localdomain> <20140109171932.2c48b131@soldur.bigon.be> <1389285402.15747.31.camel@x220.localdomain> <52CF05E6.7070904@redhat.com> Message-ID: <52CF0743.4050305@tycho.nsa.gov> To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com On 01/09/2014 03:26 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > On 01/09/2014 11:36 AM, Dominick Grift wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 17:19 +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote: > >>> >>> Actually it's the same code as rpm currently uses. >>> >>> It looks at the fcontext of the script then uses secure_compute_create to >>> see if a transition would occures. If it's the case it will make it >>> transition to that context, otherwise it's indeed using a hardcoded >>> context. > >> hard-coding configurable security identifiers is bad practice. I would not >> look too much to Fedora. > >> In /etc/selinux there are config files that tell selinux aware programs >> what context to use in what situations. Programs should consult those >> config files, then use that information to determine whether to transition >> or not, and where to. > >> Disclaimer: thats just my opinion > >> _______________________________________________ refpolicy mailing list >> refpolicy at oss.tresys.com http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy > > It has been like that for years. Might have been a chicken and egg problem on > initial install. RPM Now has better flexibility. bootstrapping issue - needed to know the right domain prior to any policy files being installed on the filesystem.